Seneca v ATR Electrical
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
From: Bulgaria
You can not compare, they are just different.
Here for the ATR42: SmartCockpit - Airline training guides, Aviation, Operations, Safety
Here for the ATR42: SmartCockpit - Airline training guides, Aviation, Operations, Safety

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
From: UK
No real comparison
Seneca:
One battery + two generators + external power connector (DC)
ATR:
Two batteries (main + emergency),
Two engine driven DC starter/generators,
Two static inverters (supplied by DC system) each supplying Constant Frequency AC power at two voltages,
Two engine driven AC Wild frequency generators,
Two external power connectors (DC and AC)
Two separate networks (1(left) and 2(right)) run serarately but can be connected through Bus Tie Contactors.
One battery + two generators + external power connector (DC)
ATR:
Two batteries (main + emergency),
Two engine driven DC starter/generators,
Two static inverters (supplied by DC system) each supplying Constant Frequency AC power at two voltages,
Two engine driven AC Wild frequency generators,
Two external power connectors (DC and AC)
Two separate networks (1(left) and 2(right)) run serarately but can be connected through Bus Tie Contactors.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
From: wolves
"Can Someone enlighten me as to the main difference between the c152 and the space shuttle electrical systems as I'm not too familiar with the space shuttle ."
No major difference, just one is a little more complex than the other. That and you don't get drinking water from the C152 generator.
No major difference, just one is a little more complex than the other. That and you don't get drinking water from the C152 generator.





